Letter to Jordan Peterson

Dear Jordan Peterson,

I am writing to you to respond to your interview where you covered various controversial subjects, three of whom I wish to comment on. First you question the existence of patriarchy, and you insist that Western society disadvantages men just as much as in disadvantages women. Then, you evoke man’s necessity to be as competent as possible, and argue that it has led to them traditionally occupying most positions of power. Finally, you discuss the biological difference in between the two sexes, and you claim that men’s genetics program them to be more aggressive, competitive and concerned by social status and hierarchy. Personally, I share most of your opinions, although I believe that some of your arguments lack scientific proof to back it up or that they are misleading as you imply controversial opinions that can be interpreted very differently.

In your interview, you repeatedly insist that the patriarchy doesn’t exist in modern Western society. For example, when you deny that Western society is male-dominated, you justify this statement by saying that most people in prison are men, most people victims of violent crimes are men, most suicides are committed by men, more men on the streets are men and that men do worse in school. You also say that, when responding to the statement: “The majority of wealth is owned by men”, you reply that “That’s a very tiny proportion of men”. Although I agree with all these facts and know that they are all true, I believe that your answer is slightly incomplete, because you don’t fail to mention men’s disadvantages in society, but you don’t talk about women’s advantages in society, such as women performing better at school than men, women having a longer life expectancy, or the fact that women are expected to do less in society, like do dangerous jobs or even propose to a partner. Furthermore, you later claim that “there’s an asymmetry in all sorts of places”. I believe that this argument is totally valid, as women obviously suffer in some aspects of society, such as being more subject to rape, or having worse wages compared to men doing the same job, but in your interview, you also explain many disadvantages that men have in society, such as those already mentioned, or the psychological and social pressure to which they are subject, such as the stereotypes forbidding men to cry or show their emotions.

Throughout your interview, your constantly infer that men are more driven by the need to be as competent as possible, which historically leads to them holding the majority of the positions in power. You reinforce this statement by saying that “the fundamental basis of [patriarchal] structure is not power, it’s competence”. You then use the example of a plumber, who is likely to be male, saying that you are not forced to hire a male plumber, but the probabilities are high as most people who have the capacities to offer this service are men. I agree as I think that you could also have demonstrated it using an example that works the other way round, for example babysitting. Most people, when they hire a babysitter, will hire a woman as they are stereotypically nicer and better with handling children. However, your argument is true concerning manual labour, but isn’t completely true in overall competence, because, in 2021, 56% of students in higher education in France were women.

...